Well, one way of bringing down the cost would be to start at the liability. Because believe it or not, one big part of medical costs is liability insurance (or, in case of large pharma corporation, a sizable legal and liability reserve. You'll notice a curious coincidence of the price of medical procedures and pharmaceuticals and the amount of money you can milk from "malpractice". If it has to be actual malpractice, i.e. a doctor deliberately or in gross negligence actually causing you harm, it's usually way cheaper than when courts hand out verdicts of malpractice for basically unavoidable side effects or bullshit like "mental anguish".
That's what happens when most of your revenue comes from just one product AND you manage to make it inferior and inferior with every single incarnation you pump out.
MS would be in the same hole if they relied only on Windows...
But I want one. And guess what, my money goes to someone giving me what I want, not what I need. If people only bought what they needed and not what they want, hookers wouldn't give blowjobs.
MMOs used to have even more complicated systems of stats and attributes in the old days (AO anyone?). With most contemporary MMOs, it boils down to 3-4 stats per class (yes, there are like 10 but every class only really uses 3-4 of them). And for those that don't want to do the math, there's usually plenty of guides along the lines of "get this sword from that mob in this dungeon, get that shield from that boss in that dungeon...", so in the end it ain't that difficult either.
Not gonna happen. No chance in hell. Simply due to the nature of MMOs.
Never noticed how certain places are brimming with activity while others are deserted? And how this shifts time and again with every update, expansion, DLC and content creation? Naturally spreading fauna and flora would pretty much become a problem right out the door, with "nature" overgrowing places that used to be well populated when the majority of players move on. Now, one could say "ok, then the old gathering place becomes a lost city". Ok, and where should new players go and level? There is a reason why places are populated in MMOs, and usually the main reason is that such a place is a hub where you can easily and quickly reach all the interesting places you have to go to. Having such a place is crucial for leveling quickly, something that new players MUST do if you want to balance the loss of players that quit with new blood. You have to give these people a way to reach level cap in a reasonable time and participate in endgame content or they will lose interest. Nobody wants to be behind forever.
Letting "nature" take over is a horrible idea. At least if you want your MMO to survive.
We're talking market share, not number of people using it. Most people watching TV do so without paying anything but the ridiculous "TV ownership fee". While gamers tend to spend quite a few quid on games every year.
It's not as bleak as you put it. First of all, RPGs still exist, despite MMOs. Mostly because, despite the name, they're two very different kinds of games. Yes, you play a character in both of them. But that's where the similarities end. In a single player RPG, your exploits matter. The world can be shaped by your deeds and misdeeds, something that is completely impossible in an MMO. If what you did mattered in the world there, the next player couldn't experience the same game. If in your RPG you slayed the dragon of eternal destruction and got that sword of ultimate awesomeness, the dragon is dead and the sword is claimed, and townspeople will sing praises for you. In an MMO, the dragon respawns a few minutes later and drops another ultimate sword. And nobody talks about it because MMO worlds are static. They cannot change based on the actions of a single person because, well, how should anyone else play them if they did?
Instead it's mostly a matter of cooperative collection of loot.
But that aside, microtransactions have become a pest in games, but only because we let them. There is actually a very, very simple way to not participate in them: Don't buy games that have them. Yes, believe it or not, such games do exist.
What has the world come to? You think you get a free app and suddenly you notice that it has a nefarious purpose. Wasn't teh interwebs supposed to be the place where you get everything for free?
People don't understand what digital privacy means. If they did, they probably would care a lot.
Take things like those kids watches that let you track them, listen to them and call them. Helicopter parents love them. If they knew that the security of those devices is SO crappy that EVERYONE can track their kids, eavesdrop on them and call them, they probably wouldn't love them as much anymore.
That a company (and everyone paying them or serving a relevant subpoena) knows about your preferences and interests. In our time and age with our zeal to outlaw pretty much anything that's fun or "morally wrong" (or both), are you certain that your interests won't come to bite you in the ass? Guilt by association is a big thing these days, ya know, so are you sure that all your "friends" (I'll use that term loosely here since it's Facebook) are not doing something that's morally or legally "wrong" and you're guilty by associating with them?
All that's necessary to really ruin your day is that one of the people you happened to "friend" on Facebook turns out to be a religious nutjob that turns around and kills a few dozen people and you just recently liked one of his postings about food.
Then you might be able to explain why that high fructose crap lies like lead on the shelves in areas where real sugar soda is available, even though the latter is a few cents more expensive, and why those places with the real sugar stuff are few and far between?
Capitalism provides the opportunity to minimize that number of losers. Under socialism everyone except the elite were the losers.
The way you put it, I fail to see the difference.
The main difference is that in communism, you can more easily blame the system for failing while in capitalism it's easier to put the blame on the person failing, no matter whether he actually could do anything different.
Slashdot Mirror
Globules is maybe the most decadent form of sugar for your tea.
Well, one way of bringing down the cost would be to start at the liability. Because believe it or not, one big part of medical costs is liability insurance (or, in case of large pharma corporation, a sizable legal and liability reserve. You'll notice a curious coincidence of the price of medical procedures and pharmaceuticals and the amount of money you can milk from "malpractice". If it has to be actual malpractice, i.e. a doctor deliberately or in gross negligence actually causing you harm, it's usually way cheaper than when courts hand out verdicts of malpractice for basically unavoidable side effects or bullshit like "mental anguish".
As people get stupider, they're more ready to believe bullshit. Makes sense when you think about it.
But I I wanted to fund someone else's death, I could just invest in some weapon manufacturer. I get revenue, they get killed, it's just so win-win.
Gee. Considering how many times I flushed the toilet and used it to transport shit, let's hope it doesn't hold grudges.
Did anyone even know about this before now?
Be honest. If you got paid to develop something you KNOW cannot work and are not required to make it work... would you refuse?
Property damage. What else would it be?
Well, at least these surveillance cams are easy to avoid.
You left out the part where I should give a damn.
It's spelled Kook.
That's what happens when most of your revenue comes from just one product AND you manage to make it inferior and inferior with every single incarnation you pump out.
MS would be in the same hole if they relied only on Windows...
But I want one. And guess what, my money goes to someone giving me what I want, not what I need. If people only bought what they needed and not what they want, hookers wouldn't give blowjobs.
Don't blow the plane up, the package ain't on board!
MMOs used to have even more complicated systems of stats and attributes in the old days (AO anyone?). With most contemporary MMOs, it boils down to 3-4 stats per class (yes, there are like 10 but every class only really uses 3-4 of them). And for those that don't want to do the math, there's usually plenty of guides along the lines of "get this sword from that mob in this dungeon, get that shield from that boss in that dungeon...", so in the end it ain't that difficult either.
Not gonna happen. No chance in hell. Simply due to the nature of MMOs.
Never noticed how certain places are brimming with activity while others are deserted? And how this shifts time and again with every update, expansion, DLC and content creation? Naturally spreading fauna and flora would pretty much become a problem right out the door, with "nature" overgrowing places that used to be well populated when the majority of players move on. Now, one could say "ok, then the old gathering place becomes a lost city". Ok, and where should new players go and level? There is a reason why places are populated in MMOs, and usually the main reason is that such a place is a hub where you can easily and quickly reach all the interesting places you have to go to. Having such a place is crucial for leveling quickly, something that new players MUST do if you want to balance the loss of players that quit with new blood. You have to give these people a way to reach level cap in a reasonable time and participate in endgame content or they will lose interest. Nobody wants to be behind forever.
Letting "nature" take over is a horrible idea. At least if you want your MMO to survive.
We're talking market share, not number of people using it. Most people watching TV do so without paying anything but the ridiculous "TV ownership fee". While gamers tend to spend quite a few quid on games every year.
It's not as bleak as you put it. First of all, RPGs still exist, despite MMOs. Mostly because, despite the name, they're two very different kinds of games. Yes, you play a character in both of them. But that's where the similarities end. In a single player RPG, your exploits matter. The world can be shaped by your deeds and misdeeds, something that is completely impossible in an MMO. If what you did mattered in the world there, the next player couldn't experience the same game. If in your RPG you slayed the dragon of eternal destruction and got that sword of ultimate awesomeness, the dragon is dead and the sword is claimed, and townspeople will sing praises for you. In an MMO, the dragon respawns a few minutes later and drops another ultimate sword. And nobody talks about it because MMO worlds are static. They cannot change based on the actions of a single person because, well, how should anyone else play them if they did?
Instead it's mostly a matter of cooperative collection of loot.
But that aside, microtransactions have become a pest in games, but only because we let them. There is actually a very, very simple way to not participate in them: Don't buy games that have them. Yes, believe it or not, such games do exist.
But ... actually ... now that I think about it ... where actually IS the outrage from the Oval Office Orange? Shouldn't he be fuming and twittering?
I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you!
What has the world come to? You think you get a free app and suddenly you notice that it has a nefarious purpose. Wasn't teh interwebs supposed to be the place where you get everything for free?
People don't understand what digital privacy means. If they did, they probably would care a lot.
Take things like those kids watches that let you track them, listen to them and call them. Helicopter parents love them. If they knew that the security of those devices is SO crappy that EVERYONE can track their kids, eavesdrop on them and call them, they probably wouldn't love them as much anymore.
That a company (and everyone paying them or serving a relevant subpoena) knows about your preferences and interests. In our time and age with our zeal to outlaw pretty much anything that's fun or "morally wrong" (or both), are you certain that your interests won't come to bite you in the ass? Guilt by association is a big thing these days, ya know, so are you sure that all your "friends" (I'll use that term loosely here since it's Facebook) are not doing something that's morally or legally "wrong" and you're guilty by associating with them?
All that's necessary to really ruin your day is that one of the people you happened to "friend" on Facebook turns out to be a religious nutjob that turns around and kills a few dozen people and you just recently liked one of his postings about food.
Good. For a moment I was worried about the fate of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Then you might be able to explain why that high fructose crap lies like lead on the shelves in areas where real sugar soda is available, even though the latter is a few cents more expensive, and why those places with the real sugar stuff are few and far between?
Capitalism provides the opportunity to minimize that number of losers. Under socialism everyone except the elite were the losers.
The way you put it, I fail to see the difference.
The main difference is that in communism, you can more easily blame the system for failing while in capitalism it's easier to put the blame on the person failing, no matter whether he actually could do anything different.